| Title |
Effect of administrative information on visit rate of frequent attenders in primary health care: ten-year follow-up study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12875-018-0836-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anne K. Santalahti, Tero J. Vahlberg, Sinikka H. Luutonen, Päivi T. Rautava |
| Abstract |
Frequent attenders (FAs) use a disproportionately large share of the resources of general practitioners (GPs) working in primary healthcare centres. The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of FAs among all patients in the primary health care centres of a medium-sized city in Finland, and to examine whether providing GPs with administrative information about their frequent attenders (names and numbers of visits per year) can reduce the number of FAs and the frequency of their visits. Statistic data on all GP visits (n = 1.8 million) to 11 public healthcare centres in one city were collected from the electronic patient records covering the period from 2001 to 2010. A FA-patient was defined as a person who made10 or more visits to GPs during one year. The baseline situation in 2001 was compared with the situation in 2006 after administrative information had been provided three times to all GPs working in the healthcare centres. Poisson's regression analysis was used, and FA numbers and consultation rates in the years 2002-2005 were compared with the year 2006; figures for 2006 were also compared with those for the follow-up period 2007-2010. During the years 2001-2006, the proportion of visits of FA-patients fell overall from 9.1 to 8.5%, a decline of 0.6% (p < 0.0001). This reduction was equivalent to an annual work load of two GPs in the study center. The proportion of visits of FA patients increased again in the follow-up period (2007-2010), when administrative information was no longer provided. When GPs are provided with information on the number and names of their FA-patients, the annual rate of FA visits to GPs drops significantly. The method is simple and repeatable. However, without a control group of GPs who have not received such information, it is impossible to assess if the intervention was the only circumstance affecting the reduction in FA consultation rates. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,954
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,697
of 344,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#47
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.